Epiphany: I imagine this kind of graphing becomes particularly useful if you practise the kind of atomised note-taking (one draft per thought) that Zettelkasten encourages…
For example: if you’re making notes from an article, with a “structure” or “meta” note that essentially serves as an index for all of the notes from that article, graphing links provides a) a way to zoom out and visualise all of the notes linked directly to that article; b) a map of connections between the article’s individual notes and notes related to other articles/topics/themes/subjects. That sounds really useful, and sounds like it might support further discovery/insight.
Side note: this is one of the principles I feel like I’m in-between on— I’m used to a single draft containing a range of thoughts on any particular subject or topic. So all of my notes from one article/text/whatever would typically sit in a single draft, with quotes, my responses to those quotes, other thoughts, captured actions, etc. But I’m starting to see the benefit of breaking things down further, particularly since a draft is essentially Draft’s smallest functional unit, and cross-linking seems to more useful when linking at the level of the smallest functional unit.
@martinpacker / @Andreas_Haberle: For current graphing efforts, is there any way to indicate the number of connections a single node has (beyond the density of visible connection lines)? I think Roam-like graphs use node-size as a variable to indicate density of connections, right? Alternatively perhaps some way to manually specify/indicate “meta” nodes (perhaps based on a tag or text token within the draft content), where “meta” nodes could have a specific colour? Does any of that sound useful to consider?